Bedtime for the Call/Put Ratio
Intuitively it sounds like a very reasonable theory. With call options investors can speculate on rising prices, with puts they can place their bets on falling stock markets. If relatively more calls than puts are being bought, speculators apparently are optimistic.
put/call ratio get lots of press
Trader blogs are paying close attention to this put/call ratio (Vix and More and MarketSci). Even the derivative exchanges like Chicago’s CBOE publish call/put ratio’s. They even run a derived call/put ratio index. They are missing the point. The only reason this call/put ratio is mentioned now and then is the commercial newsletters have to be filled with “analysis”. Retail traders are having a hard time making a living anyway, and will put their faith in any possible combination of indicators that will justify their trading decisions.
Why put/call ratio makes no sense
- In the professional market calls aren’t really different from puts. A delta-hedged call has the same pay-off as a delta-hedged put in the same strike. If there’s no distinction between calls and puts, the ratio doesn’t make sense.
- For every single buyer of an options contract, there is a seller too. Hard to say who is right.
- As expected, there has been no statistical evidence of any relationship between call/put ratios and stock performance.
- All market participants have slightly different objectives. Arbitrage against other instruments, hedging underlying portfolio’s, outright speculators.. The casino-idea that professional traders are selling options to the retail investors, is not true.
As a true kind of financial “common knowledge”, the call/put ratio won’t ever disappear. All tools can and will be used to find the holy grail of the market’s crystal ball.
In the post you linked to on my blog, I state:
"Open source academic research on the internet also confirms that the put/call ratio has no statistical advantage as a simple oversold/overbought indicator in any market but one – the S&P 500 – and only then when combined with the volatility index and the TRIN."
This evidence, as presented, can be found here:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/78002108/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
Saying there is no statistical evidence between the put/call ratio and stock performance is very different than saying that the ratio has no statistical advantage as an oversold/overbought ratio in any market (except one, if Simon and Wiggins are to be believed).
Personally, I'm inclined to agree with your position, but I'm also open to a discussion of some strong empirical evidence. What was presented in the Simons and Wiggins article wasn't very convincing because the conditions were very specific. While it makes for rigorous study, this specificity has its own practical limitations for long term successful deployment in a robust trading strategy.
Nice blog by the way.
Hi,
Can you please explain a little more why a delta-hedged call has the same pay-off as a delta-hedged put at the same strike?
Many thanks!
Sorry guys but a delta hedged call doesn’t have the same payoff as a delta hedged put!
The first position equals to a synthetic put whereas the second one is a synthetic call…
That makes quite a difference!
Your problem stems from the definition of “delta hedge”. If you use delta hedge as you should (the atm strike has a 50% delta), the delta hedged call is the same as a delta hedged put.
If you think delta hedge means hedging with 100% underlying, that’s another story.